The removal of a question about mental health history on the New York state bar application was celebrated this week at the state's law schools, where leaders said the change sends a positive message about the importance of mental health in the legal profession as a whole.

As she announced the change Wednesday in the 2020 State of the Judiciary address, Chief Judge Janet DiFiore acknowledged that some law students had avoided seeking mental health treatment because they were worried about answering "yes" to the question, which asked if the prospective attorney had "any condition or impairment" relating to mental health.

Lindsay Kendrick, dean of students and assistant dean for diversity and inclusion at New York University School of Law, said the change does not end stigma against mental health treatment overnight, but it removes one barrier for students who want to seek help.

"I felt like there's long been this disconnect between the advice I've been able to give students and then the implications of that advice," Kendrick said. "I'm a big fan of therapy, I'm a big fan of mental health treatment, but unfortunately we've been living in a regime where that did have real-life implications for students."

Melanie Leslie, the dean of Cardozo Law School, said she hopes the change will encourage students to seek help as soon as they need it.

"I want to send the message to my students that seeking help is a sign of strength, not a sign of weakness," she said. "We need to help them understand that, that it's a positive thing to seek the help that you need and not something they should be ashamed of or afraid to do."

Leslie said she has seen more and more conversation about mental health, including from law firms, in the past year. The change in the bar application is an important step toward changing the legal profession's attitude toward mental health overall, she said.

"I think there's … maybe an ethic in the profession that being strong means handling stress on your own," Leslie said.

In reality, Leslie said, seeking help in law school can give prospective lawyers important tools for success in the profession and in their personal lives.

NYU Law School students Jared Fore and Ryan Woods praised the change, saying they hope the states that still have similar questions will reconsider them. Woods, a second-year student, is the president of NYU Law's Mental Health Law and Justice Association, while Fore, a third-year student, is a former president.

"Now someone can see a psychiatrist or therapist, receive medication, and undergo other forms of treatment if they believe this would help them," Woods said. "And they do not need to worry about the gatekeepers of their chosen profession digging into this incredibly private aspect of life, when it needn't reflect on one's ability to perform competently … even superbly … as a lawyer at all."

The newly rewritten question asks if the applicant has ever used "any condition or impairment" as a defense in a formal proceeding at school or in a workplace setting.

"I think it's a good start," Kendrick said.

Leslie said focusing on past behavior and acts, and not whether applicants have ever sought help, is an appropriate change.

"If there's been an episode or an act that is troubling, then that can be discussed," she said.

Woods emphasized the importance of the distinction between medical history and past conduct, saying the legality of the old question was "dubious, to say the least."

The law school deans' letter was organized by Mary Lu Bilek, dean of the City University of New York School of Law. Bilek said Thursday that the change will help law students learn to handle challenges in a healthy way throughout their careers.

"Seeking help allows them to proactively manage to insure competency and is the most we can wish from everybody at the bar," she said.

The announcement from DiFiore follows a campaign for change that included the New York State Bar Association, the American Bar Association, the New York City Bar Association and the deans of 14 of New York's 15 law schools, who sent a letter in November urging the court system to remove the question.

Read more: